WHich in no way explains why the judge told the entire country to STFU about it.

Same source:

"The judge added: “You have to understand we are not preventing publication. We are postponing publication to ensure that the trial [that Robinson recorded] is fair."

A judge should not be allowed to tell an entire country to STFU It does not matter what the reason.

Well that's the law in every country on earth, so... I wonder if you even know what you're talking about.

I realiz there is no right to free speech in Canada so I can understand you don't know what you are talking about.

“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

Here's the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression in Canada:

Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

"2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association."

IOW, freedom of expression can and should be put on hold to protect the right to a fair trial.

The U.K. is a country without anything even remotely comparable to the First Amendment, which still has creepy, frightening blasphemy laws, and where truth is not necessarily a defense to a defamation lawsuit.

The American system, readers need to be reminded, is about liberty – the system in England is about order, which is one of the reasons why American patriots had to overthrow the yoke of English tyranny in 1776. Liberty is frightening to intellectually stunted legal bureaucrats obsessed with order, which helps to explain why the English legal system has treated a heroic figure like Robinson so harshly.

This sounds familiar to me. It is the same thing in Singapore, which inherited British laws. Our government used these laws to stifle free speech. The difference is that those who get into trouble here are leftists while in the UK, it is the rightists like Tony Robinson who gets into trouble. And the politicians are trying to censor the truth.

Maybe that's why things are better managed here because these laws are used to shut up the people who really talk nonsense. I agree with what Robinson said - Koran is a violent hateful book. Islam is more than a religion. It is also an ideology, an imperialistic ideology. Robinson is trying to get the truth out.

However, I must confess that if someone talks like Robinson in Singapore, he is also going to jail. The difference is that our leaders secretly believe in what he says and so ACT accordingly. Very few Muslims migrate here. On the other hand, British politicians act as if they truly believe in what they say about Islam - that it is a religion of peace.

Here's the constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression in Canada:

Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

"2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association."

IOW, freedom of expression can and should be put on hold to protect the right to a fair trial.

Your law says so.

My law says so.

English law says so.

And the guy who copped a plea here says so!

Ann Coulter says you aren't telling the truth.

I say you are munging your answer by comparing a judge ordering PARTICIPANTS in a criminal trial not to discuss the trial to a Judge ordering an entire country to STFU about it.

“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros